[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] trust new architecturally-defined TSC Invariant bit on Intel systems

[Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> > If TSC is reliable, is it still necessary to rendezvous?
> > I thought the rendezvous was only needed if the slopes
> > differ (but not sure I've thought it all the way through).
> > No sense stealing all those pcpu cycles to rendezvous if
> > it's not necessary, especially on a large system.
> > (Maybe TSC reliability IS useful for Xen, not just for
> > exposing to userland :-)
> 
> Possibly not, but I was only reworking your original patch 
> which didn't
> avoid rendezvous either.

Actually it did (avoid rendezvous), but I have to admit
it was accidental: I was trying to avoid the write_tsc's
not the rendezvous, and I didn't notice the additional
implication until I was looking at the difference between
my patch and yours.

I'll look at this more in a few days...

Dan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel